Efficient method of retesting integrated circuits

ABSTRACT

Efficient production testing of integrated circuits (ICs). A first production test is implemented on a group of ICs and failures among the test group are assessed. Specifically, the results of the first test are analyzed such that ICs having a recoverable fail and ICs having a non-recoverable fail are differentiated. The ICs are integrated based on the analyzed results and a second production test is implemented. The second production test tests the ICs responsive to the segregation, such that the second production test is limited only to ICs with a recoverable fail. The next succeeding production test will then use the new test program in the second production test with the handler bin designated as having ICs not to be re-tested.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION(S)

This application is a continuation patent application claiming thebenefit of the filing date of U.S. patent application Ser. No.13/833,308, filed on Mar. 15, 2013 and titled “Efficient Method ofRetesting Integrated Circuits”, now pending, which is herebyincorporated by reference.

BACKGROUND

Technical Field

The present invention relates to testing integrated circuits (ICs) forfinal test area. More specifically, the invention relates to a processfor efficient testing of ICs through successive testing with embeddedsegregation.

Background

An integrated circuit, hereinafter referred to as an IC, is a smallelectronic device made out of a semi-conductor wafer. IC testing isintegral to the process of manufacturing ICs to ensure that the ICs meetquality control standards. Manufacturing of ICs is in itself a timesensitive process. Similarly, testing of ICs is also time consuming.

Different testing protocols have been employed to reduce a cycle timefor testing ICs. While some of these protocols reduce testing time,there are aspects of IC testing that are negatively affected, including,but not limited to, deterioration in test intensiveness. Time is afactor in IC testing, but it is not the sole factor. Prior art solutionsthat reduce time for IC testing have been affected with test coverageissues and a decrease in product reliability. Implementing hardware orsoftware upgrades may also reduce testing cycle time. However, suchupgrades involve a cost as it requires replacement of existing hardwareor software resources or fabricating additional hardware or software. Inaddition, any hardware or software upgrade may also require longerimplementation time. Accordingly, prior art solutions pertaining to testtime reduction and hardware or software upgrades have compromisedtesting cost and/or product reliability.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

This invention comprises a method, system, and computer program productfor efficiently testing ICs.

In one aspect, a computer program product is provided for productiontesting of ICs. The computer program product is in communication with acomputer-readable non-transitory storage device having computer readableprogram code embodied thereon. When executed, the computer implementstesting on ICs, including a first test and a second test. Subsequent tothe first test, the results of the first test are analyzed.Specifically, the program code supports differentiation between an ICwith a recoverable fail and a non-recoverable fail. Program code isprovided to segregate the ICs by the analyzed results. With thesegregation of the ICs, program code implements a second test. Thesecond test limited to ICs identified with a recoverable fail. Inaddition, accuracy of the segregation is assessed, which includesreplacement of the first test with the second test for a next succeedingproduction lot based on accuracy of the segregation.

In another aspect, a system is provided for production testing of ICs. Aprocessing unit is provided in communication with memory, and afunctional unit is provided in communication with the processing unit.The functional unit is provided with tools to perform production testingfor one or more ICs. The tools include, but are not limited to, a firsttest manager, an analysis manager, a segregation manager, and a secondtest manager. The first test manager conducts a first test on the one ormore ICs. The analysis manager, which is in communication with the firsttest manager, analyzes the results of the first test. Specifically, theanalysis manager differentiates between an IC with a recoverable failand an IC with a non-recoverable fail. The segregation manager, which isin communication with the analysis manager, segregates the ICscharacterized by the analyzed results. A second test manager, incommunication with the segregation manager, conducts a second test inresponse to the segregation, with the second test limited to ICsidentified with the recoverable fail. In addition, the segregationmanager assesses accuracy of the segregation of the ICs and replaces thefirst test with the second test for a next succeeding product lot ofICs.

In yet another aspect, a method is provided for production testing ofICs. A result from a first test is analyzed to differentiate between anIC with a recoverable fail and an IC with a non-recoverable fail. TheICs are segregated based on the analysis. A second production test isimplemented based on the segregation, and more specifically, the secondtest is implemented on each integrated circuit with a recoverable fail.Accuracy of the segregation is assessed, and first production test isreplaced with the second production test as a new test program for anext succeeding production lot of one or more ICs based on the accuratesegregation.

Other features and advantages of this invention will become apparentfrom the following detailed description of the presently preferredembodiment of the invention, taken in conjunction with the accompanyingdrawings.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The drawings referenced herein form a part of the specification.Features shown in the drawings are meant as illustrative of only someembodiments of the invention, and not of all embodiments of theinvention unless otherwise explicitly indicated. Implications to thecontrary are otherwise not to be made.

FIG. 1 depicts a flow chart illustrating a method for conducting a firstproduction test.

FIGS. 2A and 2B depict a flow chart illustrating a method for conductinga second production test.

FIG. 3 depicts a block diagram of a system for integrated circuittesting.

FIG. 4 depicts a block diagram showing a system for implementing anembodiment of the present invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

It will be readily understood that the components of the presentinvention, as generally described and illustrated in the Figures herein,may be arranged and designed in a wide variety of differentconfigurations. Thus, the following detailed description of theembodiments of the apparatus, system, and method of the presentinvention, as presented in the Figures, is not intended to limit thescope of the invention, as claimed, but is merely representative ofselected embodiments of the invention.

The functional unit described in this specification has been labeledwith tools, modules, and/or managers. The functional unit may beimplemented in programmable hardware devices such as field programmablegate arrays, programmable array logic, programmable logic devices, orthe like. The functional unit may also be implemented in software forexecution by various types of processors. An identified functional unitof executable code may, for instance, comprise one or more physical orlogical blocks of computer instructions which may, for instance, beorganized as an object, procedure, function, or other construct.Nevertheless, the executable of an identified functional unit need notbe physically located together, but may comprise disparate instructionsstored in different locations which, when joined logically together,comprise the functional unit and achieve the stated purpose of thefunctional unit.

Indeed, a functional unit of executable code could be a singleinstruction, or many instructions, and may even be distributed overseveral different code segments, among different applications, andacross several memory devices. Similarly, operational data may beidentified and illustrated herein within the functional unit, and may beembodied in any suitable form and organized within any suitable type ofdata structure. The operational data may be collected as a single dataset, or may be distributed over different locations including overdifferent storage devices, and may exist, at least partially, aselectronic signals on a system or network.

Reference throughout this specification to “a select embodiment,” “oneembodiment,” or “an embodiment” means that a particular feature,structure, or characteristic described in connection with the embodimentis included in at least one embodiment of the present invention. Thus,appearances of the phrases “a select embodiment,” “in one embodiment,”or “in an embodiment” in various places throughout this specificationare not necessarily referring to the same embodiment.

Furthermore, the described features, structures, or characteristics maybe combined in any suitable manner in one or more embodiments. In thefollowing description, numerous specific details are provided, such asexamples of managers, to provide a thorough understanding of embodimentsof the invention. One skilled in the relevant art will recognize,however, that the invention can be practiced without one or more of thespecific details, or with other methods, components, materials, etc. Inother instances, well-known structures, materials, or operations are notshown or described in detail to avoid obscuring aspects of theinvention.

The illustrated embodiments of the invention will be best understood byreference to the drawings, wherein like parts are designated by likenumerals throughout. The following description is intended only by wayof example, and simply illustrates certain selected embodiments ofdevices, systems, and processes that are consistent with the inventionas claimed herein.

In the following description of the embodiments, reference is made tothe accompanying drawings that form a part hereof, and which shows byway of illustration the specific embodiment in which the invention maybe practiced. It is to be understood that other embodiments may beutilized because structural changes may be made without departing fromthe scope of the present invention.

In order to maximize production testing efficiency on ICs, multipletests may be employed, and the results of a first production test areused to attain an efficiency of additional testing. FIG. 1 is a flowchart (100) illustrating a method for utilizing a first production testof one or more ICs to achieve efficiency in production testing of ICs.Three counting variables are initialized, (102), (104), and (106)respectively, with the counting variable x representing the number ofICs tested, the counting variable f representing the number of ICs thatfail the first production test, and the counting variable p representingthe number of ICs that pass the first production test. A variableX_(total) (108) identifies the number of ICs for testing in the firstproduction test. IC_(x) is tested (110), and it is determined whetherIC_(x) passed the first production test (112). A positive response tothe determination at step (112) is followed by an increment of the passcounting variable p, (114). However, a negative response to thedetermination at step (112) is followed by an increment of a failcounter as represented by the fail counting variable f (116). In oneembodiment IC_(x), assessed to have failed the first production test, isplaced in a corresponding bin handler dedicated to failed ICs.Accordingly, the ICs are tested and the number of IC passes and failsare recorded.

Following the increment of the pass or fail counting variable at eitherstep (114) or (116), respectively, the IC counting variable, x, isincremented (118). It is then determined whether all of the ICs havebeen tested (120). A negative response to the determination at step(120) is followed by a return to step (110), and a positive response isfollowed by an assessment of a pass rate for the first production test(122). Once the first production test for all of the ICs is completed,the pass rate for the first production test is assessed. As shown atstep (114), a pass counter is incremented for each integrated circuitthat has passed the first production test. Similarly, at step (116), afail counter is incremented for each integrated circuit that has failedthe first production test. The pass rate is assessed followingcompletion of the first production test for a set of ICs. In oneembodiment, the pass rate is based on a ratio of the passed ICs and thenumber of ICs assessed in total. Accordingly, a first production test isemployed and a pass rate is determined.

Once each integrated circuit has been processed by the first productiontest, a second production test is employed for a selection of the ICsthat failed the first production test, and for the succeeding lots to betested. FIGS. 2A and 2B depict a flow chart (200) illustrating a methodfor preparing and implementing this second production test. Based on theresults from the first production test, ICs are segregated into thosethat passed and those that failed. For the ICs that failed the firstproduction test, there is a further segregation to identify ICs withnon-recoverable fails from ICs with recoverable fails. In oneembodiment, the ICs are segregated by moving the non-recoverable failedICs to a handler bin designated as having ICs not to be re-tested.Placement of ICs into bins is employed to control sorting of the productwith respect to future production testing. Accordingly, ICs withrecoverable fails are differentiated from ICs with non-recoverablefails.

The second production test is limited to ICs identified as having arecoverable fail and in one embodiment, runs in parallel to the firsttest as described in FIG. 1. The variable F_(total) identifies aquantity of the failed ICs of the first production test (202), and anassociated counting variable F is initialized (204). For each failedIC_(x), it is determined if the IC, has a recoverable fail (206). Apositive response to the determination at step (206) is followed byidentifying and segregating IC_(F) as a recoverable fail (208). Thevariable f is subsequently incremented (210). Similarly, a negativeresponse to step (206) is followed by identifying and segregating IC_(F)as a non-recoverable fail (212), followed by a return to step (210).After the increment of the failed IC counting variable, it is determinedwhether all of the failed ICs were tested for a recoverable fail (214).In one embodiment, the assessment at step (214) is conducted for the ICsassessed with a non-recoverable fail. A negative response to thedetermination at step (214) is followed by a return to step (206).Accordingly, for each failed integrated circuit of the first productiontest it is determined if the IC has been identified with a recoverablefail or a non-recoverable fail.

Upon completion of the segregation of all failed circuits from the firsttest into recoverable fails and non-recoverable fails, each IC with arecoverable fail is subject to the second production test. A positiveresponse to step (214) is followed by initialized a counting variablefor the ICs identified to have a recoverable fail, N (216), whereN_(total) is the total number of ICs identified with a recoverable fail(218). Thereafter, IC_(N) is subject to the second production test(220), and it is then determined if IC_(N) passed the second productiontest (222). In one embodiment, the assessment at step (222) is for theICs that failed the second production test. A positive response to step(222) is followed by incrementing counting variable N (224). In oneembodiment, responsive to passing the second production test, IC_(N) isplaced in a handle bin designated for ICs that passed the secondproduction test. A negative response to the determination at step (222)is followed by removing IC_(N) from the group of ICs previouslyidentified with a recoverable fail (226), followed by a return to step(224). In one embodiment, responsive to failing the second productiontest, IC_(N) is placed in a handle bin designated for ICs that failedthe second production test. Accordingly, ICs subject to the secondproduction test are also subject to a second segregation.

Following the pass-fail analysis of IC_(N) subject to the secondproduction test, the IC counting variable N is incremented (226),followed by determining if all the ICs previously identified as having arecoverable fail or a non-recoverable fail were tested (228). A negativeresponse to step (228) is followed by a return to step (216). However, apositive response to step (228) is followed by determining a second passrate (230), with the second pass rate pertaining to the pass rate of theICs subject to the second production test. Accordingly, the secondproduction test and the succeeding production lot testing is limited totesting ICs that were determined to have a recoverable fail from thefirst production test.

As demonstrated, ICs with a non-recoverable fail were not subject to thesecond production test. Therefore, the determined second pass rate ofthe second production test should theoretically be greater than thefirst pass rate of the first production test. In the second productiontest a select quantity of IC fails from the first production test areexcluded, e.g. the second production test is limited to recoverablefails. As such, the denominator in the rate assessment is likely lessthan that in the first production test, thereby alluding to atheoretically greater pass rate for the second production test. Acomparison of the first and second pass rates provides insight into theaccuracy of the segregation. Following step (230), it is determined ifthe first pass rate is greater than the second pass rate. A positiveresponse to step (232) is an indication that the ICs were inaccuratelysegregated for the second production test (238). However, a negativeresponse to step (232) is an indication that the ICs were accuratelysegregated for the second production test (234). Following theassessment at step (234), the test program employed for the secondproduction test is selected for use in the testing of ICs in the nextsucceeding production lot (236). Accordingly, the accuracy of the ICsegregation is assessed through comparison of the first and second passrates.

As will be appreciated by one skilled in the art, aspects of the presentinvention may be embodied as a system, method or computer programproduct. Accordingly, aspects of the present invention may take the formof an entirely hardware based embodiment, an entirely software basedembodiment (including firmware, resident software, micro-code, etc.) oran embodiment combining software and hardware aspects that may allgenerally be referred to herein as a “circuit,” “module” or “system.”Furthermore, aspects of the present invention may take the form of acomputer program product embodied in one or more computer readablemedium(s) having computer readable program code embodied thereon.

Any combination of one or more computer readable medium(s) may beutilized. The computer readable medium may be a computer readable signalmedium or a computer readable storage medium, such as a storage device.A computer readable storage medium may be, for example, but not limitedto, an electronic, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, orsemiconductor system, apparatus, or device, or any suitable combinationof the foregoing. More specific examples (a non-exhaustive list) of thecomputer readable storage medium would include the following: anelectrical connection having one or more wires, a portable computerdiskette, a hard disk, a random access memory (RAM), a read-only memory(ROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM or Flashmemory), an optical fiber, a portable compact disc read-only memory(CD-ROM), an optical storage device, a magnetic storage device, or anysuitable combination of the foregoing. In the context of this document,a computer readable storage medium may be any tangible medium that cancontain, or store a program for use by or in connection with aninstruction execution system, apparatus, or device.

A computer readable signal medium may include a propagated data signalwith computer readable program code embodied therein, for example, inbaseband or as part of a carrier wave. Such a propagated signal may takeany of a variety of forms, including, but not limited to,electro-magnetic, optical, or any suitable combination thereof. Acomputer readable signal medium may be any computer readable medium thatis not a computer readable storage medium and that can communicate,propagate, or transport a program for use by or in connection with aninstruction execution system, apparatus, or device.

Program code embodied on a computer readable medium may be transmittedusing any appropriate medium, including but not limited to wireless,wire line, optical fiber cable, RF, etc., or any suitable combination ofthe foregoing.

Computer program code for carrying out operations for aspects of thepresent invention may be written in any combination of one or moreprogramming languages, including an object oriented programming languagesuch as Java, Smalltalk, C++ or the like and conventional proceduralprogramming languages, such as the “C” programming language or similarprogramming languages. The program code may execute entirely on theuser's computer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alonesoftware package, partly on the user's computer and partly on a remotecomputer or entirely on the remote computer or server. In the latterscenario, the remote computer may be connected to the user's computerthrough any type of network, including a local area network (LAN) or awide area network (WAN), or the connection may be made to an externalcomputer (for example, through the Internet using an Internet ServiceProvider).

Aspects of the present invention are described above with reference toflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods, apparatus(systems) and computer program products according to embodiments of theinvention. It will be understood that each block of the flowchartillustrations and/or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in theflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, can be implemented bycomputer program instructions. These computer program instructions maybe provided to a processor of a general purpose computer, specialpurpose computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus toproduce a machine, such that the instructions, which execute via theprocessor of the computer or other programmable data processingapparatus, create means for implementing the functions/acts specified inthe flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.

These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computerreadable medium that can direct a computer, other programmable dataprocessing apparatus, or other devices to function in a particularmanner, such that the instructions stored in the computer readablemedium produce an article of manufacture including instructions whichimplement the function/act specified in the flowchart and/or blockdiagram block or blocks.

The computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer,other programmable data processing apparatus, or other devices to causea series of operational steps to be performed on the computer, otherprogrammable apparatus or other devices to produce a computerimplemented process such that the instructions which execute on thecomputer or other programmable apparatus provide processes forimplementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or blockdiagram block or blocks.

A system is also provided for implementing the IC production testingmethod as described above. FIG. 3 is a block diagram (300) illustratinga system for IC testing. A computer is provided (302) having aprocessing unit (304) in communication with memory (306) across a bus(308). A functional unit (310) is provided in communication with memory(306), with the functional unit (310) having tools for implementation ofIC testing. The tools provided include, but are not limited to: a firsttest manager (312), an analysis manager (314), a segregation manager(316), a second test manager (318), and in one embodiment, aconfirmation manager (320). Accordingly, a computer is provided with afunctional unit having tools for the automation of IC testing.

A first production test is performed on the ICs (330) as the ICs (330)advance through a testing location (340). The first production test(332), as implemented by the first test manager (312), assesses the ICsfor any failures. In one embodiment, the first production test (332)specifically tests for any open/short failure or any hard failure withinan IC. In one embodiment, the first test manager (312) determines afirst pass rate from the first production test (332), the first passrate responsive to the proportion of ICs passing the first test (332).The analysis manager (314), which is in communication with the firsttest manager (312), analyzes the results of the first test.Specifically, the analysis manager (314) differentiates between ICssubject to the first production test (332) that have a recoverable failand ICs that have a non-recoverable fail. The segregation manager (316),in communication with the analysis manager (314), segregates the ICs(334). The ICs are segregated according to the differentiationestablished by the analysis manager (314). In one embodiment, thesegregation manager (316) segregates the ICs (334) to a location (342)removed from the testing location (340). In one embodiment, thesegregation manager (316) changes specification within a handler binningof the first production test. Accordingly, a first production test isperformed on the ICs and the ICs are segregated according to ICsclassified with recoverable fails and ICs with non-recoverable fails.

The second test (336), as implemented by the second test manager (318),is limited to ICs identified from the first production test (332) withrecoverable fails. In one embodiment, the second test manager (318)determines a second pass rate, the second pass rate is based upon theproportion of ICs passing the second test (336). In one embodiment, theconfirmation manager (320) is provided and measures the differencebetween the first and second identified pass rates. A decrease in cycletime from the first pass rate to the second pass rate demonstrates anaccurate segregation of the ICs, while an increase in the second passrate from the first rate demonstrates an inaccurate segregation of theICs. The segregation manager (316) assesses an accurate segregation ofthe ICs. In one embodiment, the segregation manager (316) replaces thefirst production test with the second production test as a new testprogram for a next succeeding production lot of one or more integratedcircuit based on an accurate segregation. Accordingly, the second testmanager (318) tests ICs with recoverable fails and the accuracy of theIC segregation is assessed.

As identified above, the first test manager (312), the analysis manager(314), the segregation manager (316), the second test manager (318), andthe confirmation manager (320), hereinafter referred to as tools,function as elements to support testing of ICs. The tools (312), (314),(316), (318), and (320) are shown residing in memory (306) local to thecomputer (302). However, the tools (312), (314), (316), (318), and (320)may reside as hardware tools external to memory (306), or they may beimplemented as a combination of hardware and software. Similarly, in oneembodiment, the tools (312), (314), (316), (318), and (320) may becombined into a single functional item that incorporates thefunctionality of the separate items. In one embodiment, the tools theymay be collectively or individually distributed across a network ormultiple machines and function as a unit. Accordingly, the tools may beimplemented as software tools, hardware tools, or a combination ofsoftware and hardware tools.

Referring now to the block diagram of FIG. 4, additional details are nowdescribed with respect to implementing an embodiment of the presentinvention. The computer system includes one or more processors, such asa processor (402). The processor (402) is connected to a communicationinfrastructure (404) (e.g., a communications bus, cross-over bar, ornetwork).

The computer system can include a display interface (406) that forwardsgraphics, text, and other data from the communication infrastructure(404) (or from a frame buffer not shown) for display on a display unit(408). The computer system also includes main memory (410), preferablyrandom access memory (RAM), and may also include secondary memory (412).The secondary memory (412) may include, for example, a hard disk drive(414) and/or a removable storage drive (416), representing, for example,a floppy disk drive, a magnetic tape drive, or an optical disk drive.The removable storage drive (416) reads from and/or writes to aremovable storage unit (418) in a manner well known to those havingordinary skill in the art. Removable storage unit (418) represents, forexample, a floppy disk, a compact disc, a magnetic tape, or an opticaldisk, etc., which is read by and written to a removable storage drive(416). As will be appreciated, the removable storage unit (418) includesa computer readable medium having stored therein computer softwareand/or data.

In alternative embodiments, the secondary memory (412) may include othersimilar means for allowing computer programs or other instructions to beloaded into the computer system. Such means may include, for example, aremovable storage unit (420) and an interface (422). Examples of suchmeans may include a program package and package interface (such as thatfound in video game devices), a removable memory chip (such as an EPROM,or PROM) and associated socket, and other removable storage units (420)and interfaces (422) which allow software and data to be transferredfrom the removable storage unit (420) to the computer system.

The computer system may also include a communications interface (424). Acommunications interface (424) allows software and data to betransferred between the computer system and external devices. Examplesof a communication interface (424) may include a modem, a networkinterface (such as an Ethernet card), a communications port, or a PCMCIAslot and card, etc. Software and data transferred via a communicationinterface (424) is in the form of signals which may be, for example,electronic, electromagnetic, optical, or another signal capable of beingreceived by communications interface (424). These signals are providedto communications interface (424) via a communications path (i.e.,channel) (426). This communications path (426) carries signals and maybe implemented using wire or cable, fiber optics, a phone line, acellular phone link, a radio frequency (RF) link, and/or othercommunication channels.

In this document, the terms “computer program medium,” “computer usablemedium,” and “computer readable medium” are used to generally refer tomedia such as main memory (410) and secondary memory (412), removablestorage drive (416), and a hard disk installed in a hard disk drive(414).

Computer programs (also called computer control logic) are stored inmain memory (410) and/or secondary memory (412). Computer programs mayalso be received via a communication interface (424). Such computerprograms, when run, enable the computer system to perform the featuresof the present invention as discussed herein. In particular, thecomputer programs, when run, enable the processor (402) to perform thefeatures of the computer system. Accordingly, such computer programsrepresent controllers of the computer system.

The flowchart(s) and block diagrams in the Figures illustrate thearchitecture, functionality, and operation of possible implementationsof systems, methods and computer program products according to variousembodiments of the present invention. In this regard, each block in theflowchart or block diagrams may represent a module, segment, or portionof code, which comprises one or more executable instructions forimplementing the specified logical function(s). It should also be notedthat, in some alternative implementations, the functions noted in theblock may occur out of the order noted in the figures. For example, twoblocks shown in succession may, in fact, be executed substantiallyconcurrently, or the blocks may sometimes be executed in the reverseorder, depending upon the functionality involved. It will also be notedthat each block of the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, andcombinations of blocks in the block diagrams and/or flowchartillustration, can be implemented by special purpose hardware-basedsystems that perform the specified functions or acts, or combinations ofspecial purpose hardware and computer instructions.

The terminology used herein is for the purpose of describing particularembodiments only and is not intended to be limiting of the invention. Asused herein, the singular forms “a”, “an” and “the” are intended toinclude the plural forms as well, unless the context clearly indicatesotherwise. It will be further understood that the terms “comprises”and/or “comprising,” when used in this specification, specify thepresence of stated features, integers, steps, operations, elements,and/or components, but do not preclude the presence or addition of oneor more other features, integers, steps, operations, elements,components, and/or groups thereof.

The corresponding structures, materials, acts, and equivalents of allmeans or step plus function elements in the claims below are intended toinclude any structure, material, or act for performing the function incombination with other claimed elements as specifically claimed. Thedescription of the present invention has been presented for purposes ofillustration and description, but is not intended to be exhaustive orlimited to the invention in the form disclosed.

Many modifications and variations will be apparent to those of ordinaryskill in the art without departing from the scope and spirit of theinvention. The embodiment was chosen and described in order to bestexplain the principles of the invention and the practical application,and to enable others of ordinary skill in the art to understand theinvention for various embodiments with various modifications as aresuited to the particular use contemplated.

Alternative Embodiment

It will be appreciated that, although specific embodiments of theinvention have been described herein for purposes of illustration,various modifications may be made without departing from the spirit andscope of the invention. Accordingly, the scope of protection of thisinvention is limited only by the following claims and their equivalents.

We claim:
 1. A computer program product for use with integrated circuittesting, the computer program product comprising a computer readablestorage medium having computer readable program code embodied therewith,the program code executable by a processor to: implement a firstproduction test for testing at least one integrated circuit; analyzeresults of the first test, including differentiating between anintegrated circuit with a recoverable fail and an integrated circuitwith a non-recoverable fail; obtain an efficiency of additional testingfrom the analyzed results of the first test; segregate each integratedcircuit based on the analysis; based on the obtained efficiency,implement a second production test responsive to the segregation,wherein the second test is implemented on each integrated circuit with arecoverable fail; and assess an accurate segregation of the integratedcircuits, and replace the first production test with the secondproduction test as a new test program for a next succeeding productionlot of one or more integrated circuits based on the accuratesegregation.
 2. The computer program product of claim 1, furthercomprising program code to identify a first pass rate of the at leastone integrated circuit from the first test and a second pass rate of theat least one integrated circuit from the second test.
 3. The computerprogram product of claim 2, further comprising program code to comparethe first and second identified pass rates, and determine an accuracy ofsegregation of the integrated circuits based on the comparison.
 4. Thecomputer program product of claim 3, wherein the segregation isdetermined to be accurate in response to the first pass rate exceedingthe second pass rate.
 5. The computer program product of claim 3,wherein the segregation is determined to be inaccurate in response tothe second pass rate exceeding the first pass rate.
 6. The computerprogram product of claim 1, wherein the segregation includes changingspecifications within a handler binning of the first test.
 7. A systemcomprising: a processing unit in communication with memory; a functionalunit in communication with the processing unit, the functional unithaving tools to perform production testing for one or more integratedcircuits, the tools comprising: a first test manager to conduct a firstproduction test on the one or more integrated circuits; an analysismanager in communication with the first test manager, the analysismanager to analyze results of the first test, obtain an efficiency ofadditional testing from the analyzed results of the first test, anddifferentiate between an integrated circuit with a recoverable fail andan integrated circuit with a non-recoverable fail; a segregation managerin communication with the analysis manager, the segregation manager tosegregate each integrated circuit based on the analysis; a second testmanager in communication with the segregation manager, the second testmanager to, based on the obtained efficiency, implement a secondproduction test in response to the segregation, wherein the second testis implemented on each integrated circuit with a recoverable fail; andthe segregation manager to assess an accurate segregation of theintegrated circuits, and to replace the first production test with thesecond production test as a new test program for a next succeedingproduction lot of one or more integrated circuits based on the accuratesegregation.
 8. The system of claim 7, further comprising the first testmanager to identify a first pass rate of the one or more integratedcircuits from the first production test and the second test manager toidentify a second pass rate from the one or more integrated circuitsfrom the second production test.
 9. The system of claim 8, furthercomprising a confirmation manager to compare the first and secondidentified pass rates, and determine an accuracy of segregation of theintegrated circuits based on the comparison.
 10. The system of claim 9,wherein the segregation is determined to be accurate in response to thefirst pass rate exceeding the second pass rate.
 11. The system of claim9, wherein the segregation is determined to be inaccurate in response tothe second pass rate exceeding the first pass rate.
 12. The system ofclaim 7, further comprising the segregation manager to changespecifications within a handler binning of the first production test.13. A method comprising: implementing a first production test fortesting at least one integrated circuit; analyzing a result of the firsttest, including differentiating between an integrated circuit with arecoverable fail and an integrated circuit with a non-recoverable fail;obtaining an efficiency of additional testing from the analyzed resultsof the first test; segregating each integrated circuit based on theanalysis; based on the obtained efficiency, implementing a secondproduction test responsive to the segregation, wherein the second testis implemented on each integrated circuit with a recoverable fail; andassessing an accurate segregation of the integrated circuits, andreplacing the first production test with the second production test as anew test program for a next succeeding production lot of one or moreintegrated circuits based on the accurate segregation.
 14. The method ofclaim 13, further comprising identifying a first pass rate of the atleast one integrated circuit from the first test and a second pass rateof the at least one integrated circuit from the second test.
 15. Themethod of claim 14, further comprising comparing the first and secondidentified pass rates, and determining an accuracy of segregation of theintegrated circuits based on the comparison.
 16. The method of claim 15,wherein the segregation is determined to be accurate in response to thefirst pass rate exceeding the second pass rate.
 17. The method of claim15, wherein the segregation is determined to be inaccurate in responseto the second pass rate exceeding the first pass rate.
 18. The method ofclaim 13, wherein the segregation includes changing specificationswithin a handler binning of the first test.